<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV>
<P>Breen's statement sounds fine to me. Obviously we act in our own interest but that does not normally mean we act against S. Korean interests. For the most time our interests are similar, especially with regard to North Korea. </P></DIV>
<P>On anti-Americanism: I've lived in Korea more than 20 years, most of them in the 1950s and 60s but also in the 80s, and this issue is not new. I've never met an individual Korean whom I have had any difficulty with but as a society, Korean's love to bring in foreign proxies in their own domestic battles. I suppose everyone does but in Korea this habit seems particularly acute and has often gotten them in trouble. How else was Japan able to walk in and take over the country without a fight? This is much more of a group habit than a personal habit, however, and thus Koreans individually are easy and enjoyable to work with and to talk with.</P>
<P>It does seem like every Korean president, maybe with the exception of Kim Yong Sam, made a big deal of disputes with America--begining, of course, with Sygman Rhee. Pak was a "nationalist", Chun was a "nationalist", No was a "nationalist", YSK a "nationalist", DJ a "nationalist" and now No # 2 is a "nationalist". And in just about every case, being a "nationalist" means saying your predicessor was a flunky, setting you apart. </P>
<P>For Koreans, attacking the US as a proxy has been a very safe thing to do since the US rarely pays much attention and almost never fights back. (Carter may have been one exception--and look at where it got his Ambassador.) If they are attacking a local problem--say DJ people fighting Lee Hoi-chang--it can be very dirty. So better for the DJ people and No people to use the US as a proxy for Lee etc. </P>
<P>I think Korea specialists in the US do the same. If you like Clinton you support Framework, not the other way around. If you like Bush, you think Framework was a disaster. So maybe I am unfairly casting the Koreans. </P>
<P>But it does seem like this time, many Koreans are running more than usual danger of antagonizing Americans in a way we haven't seen before. I must admit, last week, for the first time since the "IMF" crisis, I sold all of my meager holdings of S. Korean stock. Maybe I will buy them back, now that they have fallen in price, but I'm not quite sure yet. And I must admit I like the Samsung Plasma TV at the Best Buy, but can't yet afford it.</P>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Hello all:
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>This is not a general response to the recent postings but more particular to a statement made in the posting by Mike Breen.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Breen wrote: "The problem is the widespread misperception in Korea that, in the details of the bilateral relationship, the US acts in its own interest and against Korean interest."
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>I realize that I am bringing up an issue of contention, but are the members of the list in general agreement that this is truly a "misperception"? The nature of the US-Korea relationship cannot be summed up in so simple a statement, no matter the position.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>I, for one, was surprised that the author of a very insightful piece of literature on Korea could come up with nothing more substantial.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Matthew Shapiro
<DIV></DIV>>Political Economy and Public Policy Program
<DIV></DIV>>Economics Department
<DIV></DIV>>University of Southern California
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr>Tired of spam? Get <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMLENUS/2734">advanced junk mail protection</a> with MSN 8.</html>